Gbawol42
Burning Hunk
That looks like last years model
Thats why I asked, got tricked by them saying next generation models
That looks like last years model
More updates. If I'm being too "update-y," say so and I'll keep to myself.
TLDR summary: 13 hour burns with even heat leave us impressed. I watched a pretty good back puff through the baro damper when the furnace reestablished secondaries yesterday.
Long burn times and even heat:
We've finally got proper cold weather and have found a rhythm with the Heat Commander. With our Tundra, we used to burn three to four medium loads through the day - morning, lunch, evening, and -if it was really cold - bedtime. That helped us spread the heat through the day rather than blasting for 3 hours, tapering off, and ending with us desperately trying to get rid of a thick coal bed so we could reload.
The Heat Commander is vastly improved. We've been lighting one full load around 8am . . . And that's it. The heat output is amazingly even and our house is sitting at 70* (with the tstat set to 68*) for 12 to 13 hours every day. At 8 pm, the blower is still cycling and holding the temp, though if we were in the single digits, it would be losing ground. So far, we haven't done any reloads because we like a cooler house for sleeping and let it drop to about 60* overnight.
We now spend about 10 minutes per day with the furnace. We clean out the previous fire's ash, load the box, light it off, wait about 60 seconds, close the door . . . And enjoy even heat for 12 hours.
Back puffing through the baro:
I came into the house and sat by the furnace while eating lunch yesterday. It was about 4 hours in and there were nice, lazy secondaries over very chared splits. While I was watching, the furnace lost the secondaries and I could hear the shutters adjusting to get them back.
Over a 3 or 4 minute period, the shutters incrementally opened, the charred splits began to glow bright red, and, finally, flame returned.
When it did, all of the gasses in the firebox ignited with an impressive "whump!" and a sizable puff of smoke blew out of the baro damper. I can't blame the furnace for that - it did a great job of managing the burn. I also can't blame my baro - without it, my 30-some foot masonry chimney would be an overdrafting monster.
We haven't noticed any smoke smell in the house since installing the HC, but we'll be sure to keep sniffing and report back if we discover the baro-puffs to be common.
Overall, this thing is wonderful. We're warmer, more comfortable, spend a fraction of the time having to monitor or stoke the furnace, and have burned about 30% less wood than usual (though it's also been a mild winter). I feel like the furnace is burning more efficiently and also getting a lot more of the heat into the house than the Tundra 1 did.
Nicely said. Are you running the pellet stove at all? We prefer 66-67 at night so I think I'm asking for a bit more heat.
Hi everyone,
few more answers here
Caddy Advanced and Caddy Advanced CR
Many of you are speculating about the Caddy Advanced and Advanced CR. I cannot tell much for now, but both will share the same firebox and the same controller with the Heat Commander. As it is currently, our PSG line is for HVAC instead of hardware store. We planned to offer in the PSG line an entry level furnace (Advanced) and the CR which will come with all the bells and whistles and more. For sure, the Advanced won’t be exactly the same as the Heat Commander it will be better suited for HVAC instead of DIY as most of you are. We don’t have the release date for now, the Advanced will come first and the CR will be available later. We hope both will be out on the market for next heating season.
Smaller or bigger
Ultimately, we plan to expand our wood furnace line up. As you know we used to offer 3 sizes (small, medium, large), from my point of view I'm not convinced we need a bigger unit. With the Heat Commander already being a bit bigger than the Tundra and more efficient, I think we will be able to stretch the heating area compared to its predecessor. If you really want to fill it up, you can put up to 50 pounds of wood in it, which i'm pretty sure most of the time users don't fill the furnace to the maximum. Probably a few times a year it will happen, when it gets really cold you may need to fill it up to the baffle and recharge it more than usual, but overall it will produce enough heat to keep it comfortable for most of the house.
Most of us tend to buy bigger is better. From your perspective, do you think we should provide a unit larger or smaller than the Heat Commander?
Thanks,
Nicolas
We've had long burns also! Very impressed with this thing! Pic is from today. loaded full at 5am and and coal bed at 4pm. House set at 70 and outside temp is in mid 20's. Slight breeze. House is still at 70 now! Furnace is still putting out heat! We keep the house set at 70 around the clock. I load it full when I leave for work and at bed time. Maybe 3 to 4 splits in between. The only thing I have to complain about is sometimes I can't remember if I pushed the button! Lol I believe it flashing 3 times at you if you already did. Very happy!More updates. If I'm being too "update-y," say so and I'll keep to myself.
TLDR summary: 13 hour burns with even heat leave us impressed. I watched a pretty good back puff through the baro damper when the furnace reestablished secondaries yesterday.
Long burn times and even heat:
We've finally got proper cold weather and have found a rhythm with the Heat Commander. With our Tundra, we used to burn three to four medium loads through the day - morning, lunch, evening, and -if it was really cold - bedtime. That helped us spread the heat through the day rather than blasting for 3 hours, tapering off, and ending with us desperately trying to get rid of a thick coal bed so we could reload.
The Heat Commander is vastly improved. We've been lighting one full load around 8am . . . And that's it. The heat output is amazingly even and our house is sitting at 70* (with the tstat set to 68*) for 12 to 13 hours every day. At 8 pm, the blower is still cycling and holding the temp, though if we were in the single digits, it would be losing ground. So far, we haven't done any reloads because we like a cooler house for sleeping and let it drop to about 60* overnight.
We now spend about 10 minutes per day with the furnace. We clean out the previous fire's ash, load the box, light it off, wait about 60 seconds, close the door . . . And enjoy even heat for 12 hours.
Back puffing through the baro:
I came into the house and sat by the furnace while eating lunch yesterday. It was about 4 hours in and there were nice, lazy secondaries over very chared splits. While I was watching, the furnace lost the secondaries and I could hear the shutters adjusting to get them back.
Over a 3 or 4 minute period, the shutters incrementally opened, the charred splits began to glow bright red, and, finally, flame returned.
When it did, all of the gasses in the firebox ignited with an impressive "whump!" and a sizable puff of smoke blew out of the baro damper. I can't blame the furnace for that - it did a great job of managing the burn. I also can't blame my baro - without it, my 30-some foot masonry chimney would be an overdrafting monster.
We haven't noticed any smoke smell in the house since installing the HC, but we'll be sure to keep sniffing and report back if we discover the baro-puffs to be common.
Overall, this thing is wonderful. We're warmer, more comfortable, spend a fraction of the time having to monitor or stoke the furnace, and have burned about 30% less wood than usual (though it's also been a mild winter). I feel like the furnace is burning more efficiently and also getting a lot more of the heat into the house than the Tundra 1 did.
I'd think the size of the HC would heat a larger house for sure. Ours is 1850 sqft ranch style with leaky windows. So I say the HC would be big enough! But you know us Americans!!Hi everyone,
few more answers here
Caddy Advanced and Caddy Advanced CR
Many of you are speculating about the Caddy Advanced and Advanced CR. I cannot tell much for now, but both will share the same firebox and the same controller with the Heat Commander. As it is currently, our PSG line is for HVAC instead of hardware store. We planned to offer in the PSG line an entry level furnace (Advanced) and the CR which will come with all the bells and whistles and more. For sure, the Advanced won’t be exactly the same as the Heat Commander it will be better suited for HVAC instead of DIY as most of you are. We don’t have the release date for now, the Advanced will come first and the CR will be available later. We hope both will be out on the market for next heating season.
Smaller or bigger
Ultimately, we plan to expand our wood furnace line up. As you know we used to offer 3 sizes (small, medium, large), from my point of view I'm not convinced we need a bigger unit. With the Heat Commander already being a bit bigger than the Tundra and more efficient, I think we will be able to stretch the heating area compared to its predecessor. If you really want to fill it up, you can put up to 50 pounds of wood in it, which i'm pretty sure most of the time users don't fill the furnace to the maximum. Probably a few times a year it will happen, when it gets really cold you may need to fill it up to the baffle and recharge it more than usual, but overall it will produce enough heat to keep it comfortable for most of the house.
Most of us tend to buy bigger is better. From your perspective, do you think we should provide a unit larger or smaller than the Heat Commander?
Thanks,
Nicolas
We have a rebadged Caddy, and when we first got it we couldn't keep the house over 68 when it was 30 degrees out. Fast forward with seasoned wood and a much tighter home we could keep the house 75 at 0 degrees. For me personally if you can produce a clean burning furnace with the ability to burn low and slow, why not go a little bigger. There's a number of people with large older farm houses that require a heavy heat load when needed. However for us, we push our furnace only a few times a year and it always pulls through. We also don't cut our wood at maximum length and now rarely do a heavy full load. I think of blaze king, and the large units hold alot of wood and burn for hours. What type of wood was used in the testing of the heat commander?
Heat Commander vs Tundra thermo images. The front of the Tundra got much hotter but the HC has an extra layer of sheet metal on the front.
Eric
Man looking at this some more and it's no wonder why the HC puts out more heat. It's contained in the unit better. Then transferred to the plenum. Looks like the HC pic the fire is 200 degrees hotter also? No wonder the T1 were prone to cracks. There's a lot of distortion around the air intake. Great comparisonHeat Commander vs Tundra thermo images. The front of the Tundra got much hotter but the HC has an extra layer of sheet metal on the front.
Eric
Mine runs about 200 to 300 degrees. My T1 if I remember right. Was anywhere from 300 to 550 degrees. I'm going to shut it down Wednesday and add the baro. Curious to see what the pipe looks like after a month of burning!Curious of the flue temp with the Heat Commander. Has anyone checked theirs? It's surprising how much heat my T2 strips compared to my wood stove.
Mine also throws a fair amount of heat, but not like I expected. An amazing amount of the heat is carried away by the ductwork. My basement is finished so I need the heat. Some don't, so I understand that part.This is an awesome comparison! I was always amazed at how much heat comes off the front of my heatmax 2. You can barley sit in front of it most of the time.
Is that surface or internal?Mine runs about 200 to 300 degrees. My T1 if I remember right. Was anywhere from 300 to 550 degrees. I'm going to shut it down Wednesday and add the baro. Curious to see what the pipe looks like after a month of burning!
Mine also throws a fair amount of heat, but not like I expected. An amazing amount of the heat is carried away by the ductwork. My basement is finished so I need the heat. Some don't, so I understand that part.
As I recall the advertised 'delivered efficiency' was not much higher than the H2\T2. Maybe 2%?
I'm not sure the temp readings on or through the glass is accurate, but if you look closely at the magnetic thermometer on both cleanout doors you can see they are very similar in temp.Man looking at this some more and it's no wonder why the HC puts out more heat. It's contained in the unit better. Then transferred to the plenum. Looks like the HC pic the fire is 200 degrees hotter also? No wonder the T1 were prone to cracks. There's a lot of distortion around the air intake. Great comparison
Wow, that's every last bit of energy out of that exhaust stream! I'm happy with 400-500 df (estimated) internal flue temp on my Morso after the built in heat exchanger. Once I have a properly sized insulated liner I will probably run it even lower.Internal
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.